Despite a one-on-one meeting Tuesday with President Barack Obama that lasted 30 minutes, Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., said he still has concerns about
abortion and other issues. Nelson, the only known holdout among 60 senators whose votes are needed to move the bill, said it had been his third
meeting in eight days with the president.

The Republican senator requested that any amendment considered by the Senate should be offered 72 hours in advance,in order to give Senators enough
time to read the entire amendment. This is EXACTLY what OBAMA PROMISED when he was running for President. Of course, like other promises, such as
eliminating EARMARKS, they have all been broken. Fighting fire with fire, Coburn then invoked a little used rule that requires, IF REQUESTED, a bill
or amendment be read by the clerk of the Senate. You can now view this reading of the entire 767 pages of the amendment on C-SPAN coverage of the
Senate.
Good for Coburn!

Oh this is going to be great, I know the clerk of the Senate is hating it, but it's going to take them to at least Christmas to read the entire bill.

To bad they haven't done this before now. I wonder if they are going to make a push to get rid of that rule. Also I don't think Ben Nelson is going
to vote for it, the admin threatened to put a military base, which happens to be the US Strategic Command HQ, on the list of bases to be closed if
Nelson doesn't vote for the bill. Nelson said he had drawn his line in the sand.

I hope Nelson stands his ground because the blowback from that move will hurt Obama supremely hard.

I bet this is the last time this happens. It would be neat if this was used on everything, but no way could that be allowed to happen. I wonder how
they are going to feel having their ammendments read for the world to see? Bet it's not even covered by the MSM though.

Also I don't think Ben Nelson is going to vote for it, the admin threatened to put a military base, which happens to be the US Strategic
Command HQ, on the list of bases to be closed if Nelson doesn't vote for the bill.

I hope Sen. Nelson looked him straight in the eye and said something along the lines of "I dare you".

Personally, I'd have told the President where to head in. Not in so many words perhaps, but the jist of it would have come through loud and clear.

You and I both. There is only one person that a decision like that could fall back on and that is the administration. Also playing politics with our
military isn't exactly a very good thing to be doing.

Obama repeated his demand for action, telling ABC News "the federal government will go bankrupt" if the health care bill fails. He said Medicare
and Medicaid are on an "unsustainable" path if no action is taken.

I hope he understands that the trillions he has spent and wants to continue spending is what is causing this government to go bankrupt.

I also think it is pretty lame for the President of the US to advertise to the world that we are on the verge of bankruptcy.

I also think it is pretty lame for the President of the US to advertise to the world that we are on the verge of bankruptcy.

I agree it is a pretty stupid thing to do, but consider the source.
Obama just cannot resist taking every chance that he can get, to denigrate the US. He and his wife have nothing but contempt for our country, and are
doing everything in their power to make it the "Great Socialist Experience".

They just explained why the reading of the amendment stopped. Sen. Sanders withdrew the amendment, at the request of Democrats. They knew this reading
would have gone on until Christmas, and that essentially would have killed health care.

Now they need to suggest that the bill be read before it goes to cloture.

Also Obama's explanation doesn't make one bit of sense, lets cut medicare payments because medicare is on an unsustainable path, while expanding the
buy in. Meanwhile expanding more people of the government dole with a government run program.

Really? "on the verge?" Seriously? The United States government IS bankrupt.

Bankruptcy is the state of being financially insolvent. From Mirriam Webster:
Insolvent: (noun) 1. Unable to pay debts as they fall due in the usual course of business.
2. Having liabillities in excess of reasonable market value of held assets or insufficient to pay all debts.

I would argue that decades of deficit spending combined with the deteriorating value of the dollar, plus the relentless compiling of entitlement and
guaranteed spending has left us right now, today, bankrupt. Wiser men than myself feel the same way as I do about this:
www.ronpaul.com...

As for the OP, at least somebody in Washington is reading the damned bill... unfortunately it isn't someone who's going to be voting (for or
against) over it. Our entire government can right now be broken down into two groups... the sycophantic jackasses on the Left who, rather than using
independant thought and actually representing the best interests of those who foolishly voted for them, look purely to their figurehead for
determination of what they should stand for and the cowardly jackasses on the right who, rather than using independant thought and actually
representing the best interests of those who also foolishly voted for them, just wait to see what the left is doing and then stand for the exact
opposite. The end result is the same on both sides... One hundred jackasses in the US Senate (give or take a couple with spines) and four hundred
thirty five jackasses in the US House (again, give or take) with absolutely NO moral fiber nor with any intention or track records of faithfully
representing those who foolishly elected them. 535 absolutely worthless excuses for "leaders" all standing and cheering or cajoling the
primary figurehead who's value to this nation has so far been demonstrated to be trillions in new debt used to buy a Nobel prize.

You said it all . I think I am going to copy your post and spread it around town....if thats ok ?

1. Already married...

2. Fine with me. I'd like nothing more than for the general population to start becoming educated on just how little return we're getting off of
the staggering "investments" these "representatives" are making in our names.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.